Rollup of 10 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #137715 (Allow int literals for pattern types with int base types)
- #138002 (Disable CFI for weakly linked syscalls)
- #138051 (Add support for downloading GCC from CI)
- #138231 (Prevent ICE in autodiff validation by emitting user-friendly errors)
- #138245 (stabilize `ci_rustc_if_unchanged_logic` test for local environments)
- #138256 (Do not feed anon const a type that references generics that it does not have)
- #138284 (Do not write user type annotation for const param value path)
- #138296 (Remove `AdtFlags::IS_ANONYMOUS` and `Copy`/`Clone` condition for anonymous ADT)
- #138352 (miri native_calls: ensure we actually expose *mutable* provenance to the memory FFI can access)
- #138354 (remove redundant `body` arguments)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Do not feed anon const a type that references generics that it does not have
Fixes#137865
See the comment I left in the code. We could alternatively give these anon consts the generics from the parent, but that would be moving in a GCE-esque direction that we may not want. Open to tweaks here.
r? BoxyUwU
Add `#[define_opaques]` attribute and require it for all type-alias-impl-trait sites that register a hidden type
Instead of relying on the signature of items to decide whether they are constraining an opaque type, the opaque types that the item constrains must be explicitly listed.
A previous version of this PR used an actual attribute, but had to keep the resolved `DefId`s in a side table.
Now we just lower to fields in the AST that have no surface syntax, instead a builtin attribute macro fills in those fields where applicable.
Note that for convenience referencing opaque types in associated types from associated methods on the same impl will not require an attribute. If that causes problems `#[defines()]` can be used to overwrite the default of searching for opaques in the signature.
One wart of this design is that closures and static items do not have generics. So since I stored the opaques in the generics of functions, consts and methods, I would need to add a custom field to closures and statics to track this information. During a T-types discussion we decided to just not do this for now.
fixes#131298
Revert "Use workspace lints for crates in `compiler/` #138084"
Revert <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138084> to buy time to consider options that avoids breaking downstream usages of cargo on distributed `rustc-src` artifacts, where such cargo invocations fail due to inability to inherit `lints` from workspace root manifest's `workspace.lints` (this is only valid for the source rust-lang/rust workspace, but not really the distributed `rustc-src` artifacts). The problem is that the `rustc-src` component doesn't include the root `Cargo.toml` manifest.
This breakage was reported in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138304.
This reverts commit 48caf81484, reversing changes made to c6662879b2.
cc `@RalfJung`
r? `@nnethercote` (sorry, I didn't consider this being a thing 💀)
Revert <https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/138084> to buy time to
consider options that avoids breaking downstream usages of cargo on
distributed `rustc-src` artifacts, where such cargo invocations fail due
to inability to inherit `lints` from workspace root manifest's
`workspace.lints` (this is only valid for the source rust-lang/rust
workspace, but not really the distributed `rustc-src` artifacts).
This breakage was reported in
<https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/138304>.
This reverts commit 48caf81484, reversing
changes made to c6662879b2.
Fix dyn -> param suggestion in struct ICEs
Makes the logic from #138042 a bit less ICEy and more clean. Also fixes an incorrect suggestion when the struct already has generics. I'll point out the major changes and observations in the code.
Fixes#138229Fixes#138211
r? nnethercote since you reviewed the original pr, or re-roll if you don't want to review this
By naming them in `[workspace.lints.rust]` in the top-level
`Cargo.toml`, and then making all `compiler/` crates inherit them with
`[lints] workspace = true`. (I omitted `rustc_codegen_{cranelift,gcc}`,
because they're a bit different.)
The advantages of this over the current approach:
- It uses a standard Cargo feature, rather than special handling in
bootstrap. So, easier to understand, and less likely to get
accidentally broken in the future.
- It works for proc macro crates.
It's a shame it doesn't work for rustc-specific lints, as the comments
explain.
Try to point of macro expansion from resolver and method errors if it involves macro var
In the case that a macro caller passes an identifier into a macro generating a path or method expression, point out that identifier in the context of the *macro* so it's a bit more clear how the macro is involved in causing the error.
r? ``````````@estebank`````````` or reassign
Only use implied bounds hack if bevy, and use deeply normalize in implied bounds hack
Consolidates the implied bounds computation mode into a single function, which deeply normalizes, and if it's in **compat** mode (for bevy), it extracts outlives bounds from the infcx.
Previously, we were using the implied bounds compat mode in two cases:
1. During WF, if it detects `ParamSet`
2. EVERYWHERE ELSE (lol) -- e.g. borrowck, predicate entailment, etc.
While I think this is fine, and the net effect was just that we emitted fewer diagnostics, it makes me uncomfortable that all crates were using the supposed "compat" code.
Fixes#137767
Allow struct field default values to reference struct's generics
Right now, the default field value feature (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/132162) lowers anon consts whose types may reference ADT params that the const doesn't inherit.
This PR fixes this, so that these defaults can reference ADTs' generics, and sets the `generics_of` parenting up correctly.
There doesn't seem to be a good reason not to support this, since the anon const has a well-defined type from the field, and the anon const doesn't interact with the type system like generic parameter defaults do.
r? `````@boxyuwu````` or reassign
I could also make this into an error if this seems problematic (https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/compare/master...compiler-errors:rust:default-field-value-implicit-param?expand=1)...... but I'd rather make this work and register an open question on the tracking issue about validating that this is well-vetted.
Fixes#137896
When `#![feature(min_generic_const_args)]` is enabled, we now lower all
const paths in generic arg position to `hir::ConstArgKind::Path`. We
then lower assoc const paths to `ty::ConstKind::Unevaluated` since we
can no longer use the anon const expression lowering machinery. In the
process of implementing this, I factored out `hir_ty_lowering` code that
is now shared between lowering assoc types and assoc consts.
This PR also introduces a `#[type_const]` attribute for trait assoc
consts that are allowed as const args. However, we still need to
implement code to check that assoc const definitions satisfy
`#[type_const]` if present (basically is it a const path or a
monomorphic anon const).
Update `const_conditions` and `explicit_implied_const_bounds` docs
Move documentation to query definitions, and add docs to `explicit_implied_const_bounds`.
r? project-const-traits
Introduce `feature(generic_const_parameter_types)`
Allows to define const generic parameters whose type depends on other generic parameters, e.g. `Foo<const N: usize, const ARR: [u8; N]>;`
Wasn't going to implement for this for a while until we could implement it with `bad_inference.rs` resolved but apparently the project simd folks would like to be able to use this for some intrinsics and the inference issue isn't really a huge problem there aiui. (cc ``@workingjubilee`` )
Handle asm const similar to inline const
Previously, asm consts are handled similar to anon consts rather than inline consts. Anon consts are not good at dealing with lifetimes, because `type_of` has lifetimes erased already. Inline consts can deal with lifetimes because they live in an outer typeck context. And since `global_asm!` lacks an outer typeck context, we have implemented asm consts with anon consts while they're in fact more similar to inline consts.
This was changed in #137180, and this means that handling asm consts as inline consts are possible. While as `@compiler-errors` pointed out, `const` currently can't be used with any types with lifetime, this is about to change if #128464 is implemented. This PR is a preparatory PR for that feature.
As an unintentional side effect, fix#117877.
cc `@Amanieu`
r? `@compiler-errors`
